[TIP] RFC: additional data in unittest TestResult outcomes

Michael Foord fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk
Tue Sep 22 04:59:27 PDT 2009

Robert Collins wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-22 at 12:42 +0100, Michael Foord wrote:
>> I have a preference for adding a keyword argument over proliferating 
>> methods. That's about my only comment at this point. :-)
> I want to overhaul how we do outcomes too; we have too many methods and
> its unclear what things like:
> result.startTest(self)
> result.addSuccess(self)
> result.addSkipped(self, "haha")
> result.stopTest(self)
> mean.
Really? They seem pretty clear to me.

> Thoughts on how to solve this appreciated!
> [I have another bunch of points; like I say, I need to write it all
> up ;P]
> I'll probably blog about the overall thing I want to achieve shortly;
> I'll link it here.

> This stuff is what 'unittest ain't broke, lets fix it' was aiming at.

It's a real shame I was scheduled to be speaking at the same time during 
EuroPython. :-(

Are you submitting the talk to PyCon?


> -Rob


More information about the testing-in-python mailing list